Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
Confederation Of Defence Recognized ... vs Defence on 29 January, 2024
OA/53/2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH
OA/021/53/2023
HYDERABAD, this the 29th day of January, 2024
Hon'ble Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Judicial Member
Hon'ble Ms. Shalini Misra, Administrative Member
1. Confederation of Defence Recognized Associations,
CDRA Hq, Hyderabad rep. by its General Secretary,
Sri Ajay, S/o. Pichaiah, aged about 50 years,
Occ: Chargeman, O/o. Ordnance Factory, Medak.
2. P. Jeeveswara Rao, S/o. Late P. Appa Rao,
Aged about 58 years, Occ: UDC,
1 EME Centre, Secunderabad.
... Applicants
(By Advocate: Mr. C. G. Vidyasagar Naidu)
Vs.
1. Union of India rep. by its
Ministry of Defence, New Delhi.
2. Union of India rep. by its Under Secretary,
Joint Council of Machinery (JCM),
Department of Defence, New Delhi
3. Union of India rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension,
(Department of Personal and Training),
North Block, New Delhi.
... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. G. Rajesham, Sr. PC for CG)
----
1
OA/53/2023
ORAL ORDER
(As per Hon'ble Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Judicial Member) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. By this Original Application, the applicants have prayed the following reliefs :-
"...........to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 11.11.2019 is arbitrary and unconstitutional and hence the same is liable to be set aside as MoD is not an authority to clarify or interpret any inter-alia on CCS (RSA) Rule (clause 10 of the said rule) and DoP&T is only empowered to alter or amend the statutory rules vide GST 689 (E) of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 and clause (5) of Article 148 of the Constitution but MoD has taken overriding steps and created its own interpretation altering the statutory provisions;
ii) DoPT ID No:2/4/2012-JCA Dtd: 15/01/2014 issued clarification to MoD) directed as per the Chairman of the NJCM directives to consult with the Ministry of Law and Justice, the Respondent No.1 consulted Ministry of Law where they have opined that we refrain from rendering any comments in this matter as this office does not render opinion on general/ vague/hypothetical questions as no specific legal issue has been raised by the respondents for consideration whereas the impugned order dt.11.11.2019 has wrongly mentioned opinion having been received from the Ministry of Law and Justice, O/o. LA (DEF)
iii) That a perusal of the opinions submitted by them shows that the Ministry of Labour and Employment is of the opinion that the Trade Union Act applies only to Industrial Workers while Legal Advisor (Defence) has refused to give any opinion;
iv) further, due to the impugned order dt.11.11.2019 the grievance of the mechanism of Non-Industrial employees are adversely effected since 2019 as such the impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set aside;
and to pass any such other order or orders as deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
3. When the matter is taken up for hearing at admission stage, learned counsel for the applicants submits that respondents are not considering the representation dated 21.10.2022 submitted by the Association as well as its members and are forcing the members to join the Unions for which the applicants have raised an objection.
2
OA/53/2023
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents raised objection on the ground of maintainability for jurisdiction. Since this Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain as the Act is very clear. Section 14 of Administrative Tribunal Act 1985 which reads as under:
"14. Jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Central Administrative Tribunal.--(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the Central Administrative Tribunal shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, all the jurisdiction, powers and authority exercisable immediately before that day by all courts (except the Supreme Court 2***) in relation to--
(a) recruitment, and matters concerning recruitment, to any All-India Service or to any civil service of the Union or a civil post under the Union or to a post connected with defence or in the defence services, being, in either case, a post filled by a civilian;
(b) all service matters concerning-- (i) a member of any All-India Service; or (ii) a person [not being a member of an All-India Service or a person referred to in clause (c)] appointed to any civil service of the Union or any civil post under the Union; or (iii) a civilian [not being a member of an All-India Service or a person referred to in clause (c)] appointed to any defence services or a post connected with defence, and pertaining to the service of such member, person or civilian, in connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State or of any local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India or of any corporation 3 [or society] owned or controlled by the Government;
(c) all service matters pertaining to service in connection with the affairs of the Union concerning a person appointed to any service or post referred to in sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (iii) of clause (b), being a person whose services have been placed by a State Government or any local or other authority or any corporation 3 [or society] or other body, at the disposal of the Central Government for such appointment."
5. The learned counsel for the applicants has placed his reliance upon the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.1479/2020 dated 17.02.2020 and submitted that in respect of the grievances of Federation of Recognized Services Association for their service grievances, they have to approach the appropriate Tribunal/ concerned Tribunal. It is to be noted that as far as Confederation of Defence Recognized Associations (CDRA) is concern, this Tribunal does not have jurisdiction. Moreover, the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.1479/2020 relied by the applicants' counsel does not speak about the grievances of the members of the association. Therefore, in our considered view we don't have jurisdiction to entertain. 3
OA/53/2023
6. However, the respondents are directed to consider the applicants' pending representation dated 21.10.2022. The applicants are at liberty to approach the appropriate forum / Court in a manner known to law for their grievances as prayed in the O.A. The O.A. is disposed of. In view of the order passed in O.A, MA/435/2023 is closed. No order as to costs.
(SHALINI MISRA) (DR. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE)
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
/al/
4